Hey Wichita State, wanna join us in the A-10?

[GoShockers89]

...add VCU, Richmond, St Joes, Murray St and Belmont to the Valley lineup. Or, reduce the Valley by a team or two and include LaSalle and St Bonney or GW to that lineup.

My head would explode if this happens. I would take back everything bad I've ever said about Doug Elgin. And that is a lot.

I doubt it will happen. However, I truly believe that the A-10 and MVC are now in a war of attrition- only one will survive as a respectable basketball conference, and that will be whoever acts first to raid the other.

[jdmee]

Television I believe is 400k per school in the MVC. Nothing special. CU is expected to get over 3million per with the C7

The new agreements will give the league unprecedented reach, distribution and marketing, allowing the Atlantic 10 to better serve its fans in its extensive media footprint and to leverage the promotional platforms and marketing assets of these three major national media companies. The A-10 is in seven of the top 25 media markets, including four of the top 10. Beginning in 2013-14, all 14 conference members will be in the top 65 media markets in the country and the Atlantic 10 media footprint will reach over 33 million television households, which is approximately 33 percent of the US television market.

The good for the A-10 is that all the teams are in good TV markets.

The latest reminder of this: the newly announced Atlantic 10 television contract with ESPN, CBS, and NBC. According to Kevin McNamara in the Providence-Journal the contract is surprisingly small for a large conference featuring teams in a number of large metropolitan areas and big television markets:

Sources close to the deal say that the 16-school conference will earn $40 million over the eight years, or split $5 million a season. The A-10 currently has TV deals with both ESPN and CBS Sports Network. The NBC Sports Group is a new player in college sports and is actively acquiring new products, including a recent deal with the Colonial Athletic Association.

$5 million per year, split between 14 teams means each school will get a little more than $350,000 per year from the television contract.

The Bad - Is it worth it to lose $50,000 in just TV Revenue?

[another shocker]

it would be nice. not gonna happen though.

wichita state brings them in 10,000 strong, and they can't do anything with that? are they really going to continue to be a 10,000 seat school in a 3,000 seat conference? wow..

[SubGod22]

As long as we keep winning, we're going to be a 10k team. Doesn't matter what other schools draw.

[CBB_Fan]

This is a sort of cross-post, but I support the creation of a massive, nationwide conference formed out of the shunned and neglected conferences without power conference media deals (the Catholic 7 has a power conference deal for basketball as far as I am concerned). 32 teams, 4 divisions. This is what I posted in another thread:

East: Connecticut, Temple, VCU, Richmond, Siena, Duquesne, Saint Joseph's, Saint Bonaventure
West: Gonzaga, BYU, Saint Mary's, UNLV, SDSU, Utah State, New Mexico, Nevada
North: Cincinnati, Northern Iowa, Tulsa, Akron, Wichita State, Ohio, Indiana State, Illinois State
South: Memphis, George Mason, UTEP, Belmont, Southern Miss, Murray State, Missouri State, Oral Roberts

This would be a high RPI conference, with no member having a 5 year average in the bottom half of the country. The worst three are Saint Bonaventure (120), Indiana State (129), and Missouri State (115). Scheduling would be pretty simple 9 in your division, 3 to each other division, with two protected home and homes (which don't have to be in your division).

My theory is that such a conference would get a large media deal, especially for the tournament. You would have large amounts of media attention because it is essentially a mini NCAA tournament in and of itself, which will drive betting and media interest. The other big deal is that this conference could get 10-15 teams into the tournament, which would be enough to dominate headlines in March even without a blueblood team.

To me, this is the end game. This is how you compete with the power conferences, and create a superconference for basketball that has no natural competition. You have nationwide coverage (strong on the coasts and Midwest), and you essentially kill off 4 conferences and takes most at-large contenders from the smaller conferences.

PS: I recognize the likelihood of this actually happening is essentially 0%. Still, fun to speculate on possibilities.

[jdmee]

I forgot to add about the top TV markets. The bad of the top TV markets is that these schools are much like St Louis. The ranking of interest in the area is:

1. On season Cardinals
2. On season Rams
3. Off season Rams/Cardinals
4. Blues
5. Missouri
6. U of Illinois
7. More Cardinals/Rams
8. then maybe SLU.

[BenWSU]

Who cares about Cardinals and Rams ?

[Rlh04d]

This is a sort of cross-post, but I support the creation of a massive, nationwide conference formed out of the shunned and neglected conferences without power conference media deals (the Catholic 7 has a power conference deal for basketball as far as I am concerned). 32 teams, 4 divisions. This is what I posted in another thread:

East: Connecticut, Temple, VCU, Richmond, Siena, Duquesne, Saint Joseph's, Saint Bonaventure
West: Gonzaga, BYU, Saint Mary's, UNLV, SDSU, Utah State, New Mexico, Nevada
North: Cincinnati, Northern Iowa, Tulsa, Akron, Wichita State, Ohio, Indiana State, Illinois State
South: Memphis, George Mason, UTEP, Belmont, Southern Miss, Murray State, Missouri State, Oral Roberts

This would be a high RPI conference, with no member having a 5 year average in the bottom half of the country. The worst three are Saint Bonaventure (120), Indiana State (129), and Missouri State (115). Scheduling would be pretty simple 9 in your division, 3 to each other division, with two protected home and homes (which don't have to be in your division).

My theory is that such a conference would get a large media deal, especially for the tournament. You would have large amounts of media attention because it is essentially a mini NCAA tournament in and of itself, which will drive betting and media interest. The other big deal is that this conference could get 10-15 teams into the tournament, which would be enough to dominate headlines in March even without a blueblood team.

To me, this is the end game. This is how you compete with the power conferences, and create a superconference for basketball that has no natural competition. You have nationwide coverage (strong on the coasts and Midwest), and you essentially kill off 4 conferences and takes most at-large contenders from the smaller conferences.

PS: I recognize the likelihood of this actually happening is essentially 0%. Still, fun to speculate on possibilities.

I really don't see much of a difference between this and just having four conferences in those regions with 8 teams. Why do they need to be connected? The only real positive I can see would be the huge tournament. And the truth is that the tournament would be so huge teams would probably be beaten down in time for the NCAA tournament.

Not to mention that the TV deal isn't going to be that big, as most of those teams aren't big draws, and there would be so many games that most wouldn't be able to shown on TV anyway. And with so many teams, it would get split up 32 ways. I doubt it would get more money than the Big East/Catholic deal, despite having more than 3 times as many teams.

NCAA payouts would also be cut up heavily. We'd have to get 8+ teams in every NCAA tournament for it to be an improvement for most of these teams already.

I just don't see a major benefit. You're basically advocating four separate conferences that have a joint tournament. Which, while interesting, also limits four separate conferences to only one guaranteed bid.

I don't think massive numbers are the key. I think the key is divorcing our basketball from the rest of our sports, and convincing other schools to do the same. If we divorce ourselves from all of the other sports, then we can play in the same conference as Gonzaga, VCU, George Mason, BYU, etc. A truly national conference between teams with the money to fly charter to play all of their opponents, that will earn a good TV contract, send half of the conference or more to the NCAA tournament, and bring in significant tournament revenue. There is NO reason for our basketball program's future to be dictated by the cost analysis of our baseball team, or anything else. I see no reason for all sports to be in one conference. The more money our basketball program makes, the more it can share with the other sports. Our basketball program is good enough to make $3 million a year in TV revenue and NCAA payouts in a conference, but our geography hinders our ability to play against most teams that are similar to us because of lacking the money to have the other sports travel. So leave the other sports where they are. Let our basketball team make the money, share some of it with the other sports, and all aspects of our athletic department benefit.

I see NO reason for conferences to be organized in the way they currently are. There is no reason a football, basketball, baseball, and women's volleyball should all be connected by conference. Strong football programs should join together. Strong basketball programs should join together. Strong women's volleyball programs should join together. Each program has their own strengths and weaknesses, and geographic limitations. All athletic programs should not be held back because of the geographic limitations of some of them.

[CBB_Fan]

I really don't see much of a difference between this and just having four conferences in those regions with 8 teams. Why do they need to be connected? The only real positive I can see would be the huge tournament. And the truth is that the tournament would be so huge teams would probably be beaten down in time for the NCAA tournament.

Not to mention that the TV deal isn't going to be that big, as most of those teams aren't big draws, and there would be so many games that most wouldn't be able to shown on TV anyway. And with so many teams, it would get split up 32 ways. I doubt it would get more money than the Big East/Catholic deal, despite having more than 3 times as many teams.

NCAA payouts would also be cut up heavily. We'd have to get 8+ teams in every NCAA tournament for it to be an improvement for most of these teams already.

I just don't see a major benefit. You're basically advocating four separate conferences that have a joint tournament. Which, while interesting, also limits four separate conferences to only one guaranteed bid.

I don't think massive numbers are the key. I think the key is divorcing our basketball from the rest of our sports, and convincing other schools to do the same. If we divorce ourselves from all of the other sports, then we can play in the same conference as Gonzaga, VCU, George Mason, BYU, etc. A truly national conference between teams with the money to fly charter to play all of their opponents, that will earn a good TV contract, send half of the conference or more to the NCAA tournament, and bring in significant tournament revenue. There is NO reason for our basketball program's future to be dictated by the cost analysis of our baseball team, or anything else. I see no reason for all sports to be in one conference. The more money our basketball program makes, the more it can share with the other sports. Our basketball program is good enough to make $3 million a year in TV revenue and NCAA payouts in a conference, but our geography hinders our ability to play against most teams that are similar to us because of lacking the money to have the other sports travel. So leave the other sports where they are. Let our basketball team make the money, share some of it with the other sports, and all aspects of our athletic department benefit.

I see NO reason for conferences to be organized in the way they currently are. There is no reason a football, basketball, baseball, and women's volleyball should all be connected by conference. Strong football programs should join together. Strong basketball programs should join together. Strong women's volleyball programs should join together. Each program has their own strengths and weaknesses, and geographic limitations. All athletic programs should not be held back because of the geographic limitations of some of them.

First, I agree on the conference affiliation thing. Essentially, basketball (and to a lesser extent, football) has been handicapped by non-revenue sports and travel issues.

Secondly, the point of such a large conference is to create marquee matchups in the regular season, and dominate coverage and ad-time in the postseason. Consider how many at-large bids this would produce. Not even taking into account the mega conference tournament, you would have 10-15 teams capable of earning an at-large bid. Maybe more under exceptional circumstances.

With that many teams, you would basically control basketball media in the months leading up to the postseason. Almost half of the at-large bids could go to a single conference, which means almost of the at-large coverage and speculation would be on mega-conference teams. When the tournament actually started, you would have mega-conference teams in 40-60% of the first round matchups, which would lead to more domination of the media coverage. Add the tournament to that, and you have a much stronger media presence than the conferences would have separately.

Also, remember that this basically means you help eliminate the chaff from those conferences, which is essentially what has held them back from being getting a better deal.

[Rlh04d]

First, I agree on the conference affiliation thing. Essentially, basketball (and to a lesser extent, football) has been handicapped by non-revenue sports and travel issues.

Secondly, the point of such a large conference is to create marquee matchups in the regular season, and dominate coverage and ad-time in the postseason. Consider how many at-large bids this would produce. Not even taking into account the mega conference tournament, you would have 10-15 teams capable of earning an at-large bid. Maybe more under exceptional circumstances.

With that many teams, you would basically control basketball media in the months leading up to the postseason. Almost half of the at-large bids could go to a single conference, which means almost of the at-large coverage and speculation would be on mega-conference teams. When the tournament actually started, you would have mega-conference teams in 40-60% of the first round matchups, which would lead to more domination of the media coverage. Add the tournament to that, and you have a much stronger media presence than the conferences would have separately.

Also, remember that this basically means you help eliminate the chaff from those conferences, which is essentially what has held them back from being getting a better deal.

I don't know. I feel like you're expecting all of these teams to be on a similar level. I think the "chaff" would still be there, they'd just be teams that weren't chaff until the competition increased.

And even when these teams have matched up together before, I don't think there's been much media attention on it. WSU and VCU are two of the bigger teams involved, and how much media attention was given to that game?

I also don't think you'd get teams like Conn, Cinnci, Temple, etc. to separate their basketball and football programs. I think the idea generally is that basketball should hitch itself to football, as football will be what gets you into a bigger conference, so there isn't much incentive for teams to divorce those two programs, the way I think basketball-only schools should divorce their Olympic sports.

[NattyMat]

Personally I like both ideas....Megaconference and divorced hoops conference.

That said, just a couple of more thoughts on the Megaconference:

1) How many of you are actively following the A-10 right now? The WCC? As a VCU/A-10 fan, that's pretty much my main focus right now, couldn't tell you anything about the MVC except how you all have done (since you beat us). If you go megaconference, all of a sudden A-10 fans have an interest in MVC teams, WCC teams, Big East leftovers, etc. That's a lot of extra eyeballs. You've basically just increased the interest level in every team in the conference, so increased value across the board.

2) Quality TV options. If you're NBC Sports Network and you're thinking about adding the Missouri Valley, how many quality games do you think you've got there to fill your programming? Every now and then you're basically stuck with some mediocre programming. But if you're NBC Sports, and you've got a larger amount of quality teams to choose from, you are pretty much guaranteed good programming options because you have better inventory.

Regardless, I like where heads are at on this. The most successful businesses are the ones who are thinking ahead of the competition.

[CBB_Fan]

I don't know. I feel like you're expecting all of these teams to be on a similar level. I think the "chaff" would still be there, they'd just be teams that weren't chaff until the competition increased.

And even when these teams have matched up together before, I don't think there's been much media attention on it. WSU and VCU are two of the bigger teams involved, and how much media attention was given to that game?

I also don't think you'd get teams like Conn, Cinnci, Temple, etc. to separate their basketball and football programs. I think the idea generally is that basketball should hitch itself to football, as football will be what gets you into a bigger conference, so there isn't much incentive for teams to divorce those two programs, the way I think basketball-only schools should divorce their Olympic sports.

I'll admit, the chances of this happening are 0%. The football schools are pretty much hoping to get into a bigger conference (read: BCS conference), which simply will not happen. However, I think that divisions actually sort of help prevent chaff from hurting the league. In a smaller league, you are basically mated to whatever teams are in the league. In a multi-division league, your scheduling has enough variability to help you avoid playing too many bad teams year in and year out. And more tournament play generally results in higher RPI.

[CBB_Fan]

Personally I like both ideas....Megaconference and divorced hoops conference.

That said, just a couple of more thoughts on the Megaconference:

1) How many of you are actively following the A-10 right now? The WCC? As a VCU/A-10 fan, that's pretty much my main focus right now, couldn't tell you anything about the MVC except how you all have done (since you beat us). If you go megaconference, all of a sudden A-10 fans have an interest in MVC teams, WCC teams, Big East leftovers, etc. That's a lot of extra eyeballs. You've basically just increased the interest level in every team in the conference, so increased value across the board.

2) Quality TV options. If you're NBC Sports Network and you're thinking about adding the Missouri Valley, how many quality games do you think you've got there to fill your programming? Every now and then you're basically stuck with some mediocre programming. But if you're NBC Sports, and you've got a larger amount of quality teams to choose from, you are pretty much guaranteed good programming options because you have better inventory.

Regardless, I like where heads are at on this. The most successful businesses are the ones who are thinking ahead of the competition.

I think the more likely scenario is some collusion between the A10, WCC, and MVC. Still enough to give a larger conference with similar principles, but the difficult part would be dealing with lower end teams (legal issues), and convincing everyone to make the jump. I still like the idea of a mega conference though.

[ABC]

A mega conference has yet to stand the test of time.

First the original Mega WAC that added Tulsat etc. They broke up after a few years. The mega Big East is breaking up after a few years and the mega A10 is breaking up after just one year.

Why does anyone think such a thing will work?

This is just the first year of a kinda Mega conf with the SEC and there is already talk of Mizzou going back to the Big 12.

[ShockBand]

Does anyone else think that college athletics, due to the extremely high financial costs, is a bubble that could burst in the next 8-10 years? The realignments are part of everyone trying to chase the presumed pot of gold, but I really wonder if the accelerating costs of a high level football and basketball program are really sustainable. It has always been expensive to run a college athletics program, but over the past couple of decades it seems to have become just astronomical in cost. Or am I off base with this thinking?